Spire Property Development LLP v Withers LLP
Language: English Publication details: [2022] EWCA Civ 970 Court of Appeal 19 July 2022Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Appeal by Withers against an earlier decision in the Chancery Division that they had acted negligently in advising property developers about electricity cables beneath properties they had purchased. The cables had not been discovered through searches during the conveyancing process. It was held that a solicitor owes no duty to go beyond the scope of their express instructions and give advice in relation to other matters and no obligation to advise on the Developers' rights and remedies against UKPN in relation to the HVCs. Withers did not assume legal responsibility to the Developers to advise on the legal position if UKPN did not have documentation in support of its right to lay cables through the Properties and/or in respect of their rights generally against UKPN.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE JUDGMENT (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available |
Browsing Virtual shelves, Shelving location: Online Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| ONLINE JUDGMENT Charlton v Forrest | ONLINE JUDGMENT Richmond upon Thames LBC v R. (on the application of Ariyo) | ONLINE JUDGMENT Weintraub v London Borough of Hackney | ONLINE JUDGMENT Spire Property Development LLP v Withers LLP | ONLINE JUDGMENT Smoke House & Curing House, 18 Remus Road | ONLINE JUDGMENT Hazelwood Properties Limited v London Borough of Camden | ONLINE JUDGMENT Dale House Developments Limited v Brian C Ronnie and Ryden LLP |
Appeal by Withers against an earlier decision in the Chancery Division that they had acted negligently in advising property developers about electricity cables beneath properties they had purchased. The cables had not been discovered through searches during the conveyancing process. It was held that a solicitor owes no duty to go beyond the scope of their express instructions and give advice in relation to other matters and no obligation to advise on the Developers' rights and remedies against UKPN in relation to the HVCs. Withers did not assume legal responsibility to the Developers to advise on the legal position if UKPN did not have documentation in support of its right to lay cables through the Properties and/or in respect of their rights generally against UKPN.